right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...Housing?

web page

Thoughts?

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]That phrase is not in the Constitution

 

"That phrase is not in the Constitution"

Ok. I hope I will not be subjected to a firing squad of pro-gun right wingers.


"I am quite sure that liberal and conservative bosses alike are guilty of this."
Joseph, I agree. That is why I said 'aren't conservatives guilty as well?'. Because we were already talking about how liberals don't really care for people...to leave them in squalor.

 

Joe,

The pursuit of happiness. A house helps make me happy. Therefore I have a right for the government to provide one for me.

Just kidding. Joe, you're doing a fine job, nothing I could add.


BTW, my attempt at humor was not directed at anyone. That was going to be my post before I saw anyone else's.

 

LOL...well according to Maslow's theory one needs their need for shelter to be met before they can be happy. Not debating whether Maslow was right or not, just saying what his theory said.

But FTR, do you support Habitat for Humanity or are you against it? With your statement in your post, I don't understand how you can be for it. I am for it and you guys are disagreeing with me.

 

If a house makes you happy, then pursue one.

 

at least I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You have a sense of humour, and are not mocking me.

 

This would be true if poverty and homelessness were entirely because of laziness and lack of education about the value of hard work. While this is true a lot of the time, especially in North America, this is far from the case all of the time.

 

Ok, if you are right...then SOMEONE is still getting a house for nothing. But according to Maslow I believe, the Constitution would have to guarantee a house for everyone since shelter is necessary for happiness and the Constitution gives everyone the right to pursue happiness.

But we can forget all that and just let them live on the street eh? How is letting them live on the street with no home any different than providing a crappy home and poor living conditions? It's no different.

 

King James,
If I am not mistaken you really mean the Declaration of Independence, and you need to pursue your OWN happiness. Get your OWN shelter, be it tent, cabin, house, or mansion. Do not expect one to be provided for you by the government, please. Thanks!

 

Where does the Constitution promise everyone the right to pursue happiness?

 

I should also clarify that while I believe it would be cool if a society could consider basic shelter and food to be human rights, I don't believe this is necessarily what we should do in light of practical problems and the human propensity for laziness.

 

Just an fyi that I have never advocated for this right but thought of the hypothetical to be an interesting one to consider, with obvious problems. I said this right from the start.

 

KJ,

But FTR, do you support Habitat for Humanity or are you against it? With your statement in your post, I don't understand how you can be for it. I am for it and you guys are disagreeing with me.

As JB, I'm not wild about President Carter but I agree they do wonderful work, yes, I'm all for them, but my support for them as a private individual is a completely separate matter from whether someone has a right to housing enforceable against the government (i.e., you and me). First of all, as noted above, the phrase is not in the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Some might argue the Ninth Amendment, I suppose, but such an interpretation has no basis in our history or tradition. It is also not one of the enumerated powers of Congress in Art. I, Sec. 8. Secondly, the problem with such a "right" is that if taken seriously it becomes a right to take my money to enforce it. By government's stealing from me (taking money from me against my will) and giving it to someone else, that is not a just act, as the taking does not involve punishment for a crime I have committed. IMO, the BEST book anywhere on the subject of "social justice" is Friedrich Hayek's Law, Legislation, and Liberty, vol. 2, The Mirage of Social Justice where he demolishes the arguments of John Rawls, the chief defender of that concept (Hayek is not the only one to have done so, BTW).


Gold Dragon,

This would be true if poverty and homelessness were entirely because of laziness and lack of education about the value of hard work. While this is true a lot of the time, especially in North America, this is far from the case all of the time.

It still does not give someone the right to the fruits of my labor. (Edit: I just read your last post, GD)

 

Of course not.

What I hope is that a society will reach a level of compassion for others to want to give the fruits of their labour to others. I would also hope for a society where recieving of this compassion doesn't result in laziness. Ideally with Christ, both are possible and in line with the type of society God wanted to institute with His theocracy in the Torah.

However in the reality of the fallen world we live in, both are outside of human nature and why a system like communism cannot practically work itself out. If there are ways to achieve this while addressing the realities of human nature, I believe it is biblical to support it. Such a solution does not currently exist.

 

The problem with that contention is that the Constitution does not address the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That's the Declaration of Independence, and its purpose was to challenge the divine right of kings and the Crown's continuous taxation of the colonists while denying then representation in government.

I think housing falls under the umbrella of "happiness" in the phrase. However, it should be noted that the founding fathers did not believe that everyone has a right to happiness. they have a right to the pursuit of happiness. Big difference. I believe everyone has a right to the opportunity of getting housing. But they must do something with that opportunity. The most common opportunity comes from working hard, saing a portion of your income, and buyng a house. That's what I did, and I didn't succeed until I was in my mid 30's (before that, I rented). I never expected housing to be handed to me on a silver platter.

 

For those of you who are saying that any type of handout produces laziness and a devaluation of hard work, how many of you had handouts from your parents during your childhood years? How many of you had handouts from your parents to go to university? How many of you had handouts from friends and family giving you things for your wedding or your housewarming to help you get started in your new lives there.

How many have really started from nothing and have recieved nothing? Maybe some of you have and I applaud your achievements.

There is nothing wrong with receiving those things and I recieved many of them myself. But to say that recieving them meant I am lazy or that I feel entitled to them would be false for me, and probably you as well.

I agree that our North American idea of rights as something that we are entitled to is a problematic one. What I would hope for us to be is a people who see rights as something we grant to others and not something we recieve for ourselves. Of course human nature will never let us see things this way.

Maybe the word should be privilege instead of right.